I don't really see anything wrong with this. I hate it when people are talking on the phone in the movie theaters. She and her boyfriend deserved it because I'll trust any cop before I'll trust some chick talking on the phone in the movie theater.

I really, really hate people that do this. A friend of mine took a call at a movie recently, i about killed her. I would gladly mace these people myself. But, a cop has no business doing it, unless they were actually resisting (and so far it's the cops word against everyone else-- inc. witnesses) there was no reason whatsoever to use force. Hope he gets suspended without pay for a week.

i have a tough time figuring out which of you are serious here; i hope nobody!

do you really think talking on the cell phone is a crime (serious or not)? okay, maybe not polite, but when did Miss Manners become Big Brother? so the next time you chew that popcorn loudly with your mouth falling open i should call that same cop? keep some perspective folks : this is just some movie (not even well made ), not an ICU in a hospital where the cell phone call could do some damage....

seeing how some cops are i don't doubt it at all that this cop was just some young rookie cop with a god complex that made him think he can get away with anything. i hear about cops doing this crap all the time and it's pathetic. the movie wasn't even started, it was the opening credits for goodness sake!!!

Individuals with cell phones when in a theater or meeting should put the phone on vibrate. Out of courtesy they should go to another room to actually take the call. I also believe the cop, chance are the couple were just plain rude. Thinking that they owned the theater and so lashed out at the cop.

I'm surprised that more people aren't expressing outrage over this story. People on these forums usually get all pissed when some cop uses excessive force. I think more idiot cell phone users need to be maced. But that's just my opinion! And WTF kind of name is "Warronnica"?

Police: Belligerence led to couple's arrest
An off-duty officer's version of the cell phone incident in a movie theater differs from that of the pair.
By TOM ZUCCO, Times Staff Writer
Published July 28, 2004
ST. PETERSBURG - The couple arrested Saturday at the Muvico theater at BayWalk repeatedly refused to end a cell phone call, used profanity toward an off-duty police officer and physically threatened him, St. Petersburg police say.
A police report released Tuesday sharply contradicts the accounts of Warronnica Harris and Terrell "KC" Tolson, as well as two witnesses, who claim Officer John Douglas acted without provocation when he used pepper spray to subdue the couple in the hallway of the theater.
Harris and Tolson were later charged with disorderly conduct.
The report, written by Douglas, says he was working off-duty in the BayWalk plaza when an unidentified woman complained about someone using a laser pointer in the theater.
Douglas, 41, entered the theater, saw people talking on cell phones and asked them to turn them off. Among the people he saw was Harris.
"She (Harris) said she could talk as much as she wanted on her phone," the report said. Douglas again asked Harris to stop, and again she refused.
Douglas told Harris to leave and that he would get their money back.
The couple got up, but Tolson "started to yell at the audience," the report reads. "He (Tolson) also started to yell at me. ... He stated ... I needed to keep my hands off him. That he would not go to jail because he would beat my a--."
As Douglas was escorting the couple into the hallway, Harris and Tolson "were yelling the entire time. (Tolson) kept escalating the situation."
When Tolson came at Douglas with a clenched fist, the officer wrote, he used his pepper spray. "Then (Harris) said she was going to "hit this cracker upside his head', and she swung her drink at my head."
Douglas said he then used his pepper spray on Harris.
Ray Weil, named as a witness in the report, was working as an usher in the theater that night. He entered the hallway just as Douglas, Harris and Tolson were walking by.
"As the cop was trying to get the guy to calm down," Weil, 20, told the Times, "the woman hit the officer in the back of the head with the soda. Then he (Douglas) maced her."
Two women, including one who knew Tolson, said Monday they agreed with the story presented by Harris and Tolson.
Harris and Tolson, who could not be reached for comment Tuesday, said Monday that Harris' cell phone conversation ended before Douglas arrived, that Douglas pushed Harris, and that they made no threatening remarks to Douglas before he used pepper spray.
Harris, 23, has no adult criminal record.
But Tolson, 25, was convicted of petty theft and resisting arrest in Hillsborough County in 1999, both misdemeanors.
He also has a juvenile record that includes convictions for assault on a school employee in 1996, and grand theft and battery on a law enforcement officer in 1995.
Douglas, a 14-year veteran of the police department, has no formal disciplinary actions in his personnel file.
Douglas declined comment Tuesday.
Police spokesman Bill Proffitt, who could not be reached for comment on Monday, said Tuesday that the matter now rests with the State Attorney's Office.
"We (the Police Department) were halfway expecting a complaint to be made. And there is potential a complaint may be made. But no complaint has been made."

Being rude is not an invitation to be pepper sprayed. A cop defending himself with non-lethal force might be warranted, but not because someone is rude. Jebus.. if folks in NYC were allowed to pepper spray anyone who was rude, ophthalmology would take over as the number one lucrative job in the Big Apple.

You really can't trust Orlando t.v. news to give you the whole truth. It's all about sensationalism. Besides, it was across the state and they have enough trouble getting the Orlando news right.

It would be unusual to see police getting involved in almost anything, so there must have been a good reason. The St. Pete Times account gives plenty of reasons.

Regardless of how bad the film was, people should not feel free to have a phone conversation in the theater. Let them say "just a minute" to the person on the phone and walk to the lobby. (Otherwise, you should be able to use mace, a gun, or anything else to shut them up. )

It's easier for cops to use force than to actually make an effort to do their jobs

Protect & Serve their community

This incident seems to have escalated from someone being rude on a cell phone in a movie to assault on a police officer and force used by that police officer. It seems to me that someone entrusted with such power in a community was unable to handle a simple situation.

It's easier for cops to use force than to actually make an effort to do their jobs

Protect & Serve their community

This incident seems to have escalated from someone being rude on a cell phone in a movie to assault on a police officer and force used by that police officer. It seems to me that someone entrusted with such power in a community was unable to handle a simple situation.

Click to expand...

Don't blame the cop. It doesn't matter what happened to those two people, they are just retards. If they complain about their treatment, just spit on them.

If that first story was correct, I think the cop was way out of line. Yes it's rude to be on the phone during a movie. But using pepper spray was way out of line. I could see if the people attacked him or something (which I'm not sure, becuase I'm not sure how valid the story is), but if it was just verble, the cop should be suspended for needlessly using pepper spray when there were much better ways to resolve the problem. I find it disturbing when cops use more force than they really need to. Plus, the people were unarmed, right?

ok, if that second account is true, disregard what follows, but assuming the first account to be true:

I seriously hope you all are joking. Yes, someone being on a cell phone during the *opening credits* of a movie is annoying... it does NOT justify macing people. I mean, are you kidding? Not only is this not a close case, it's not close to being close. The cop should be fired with prejudice and face criminal charges, exactly the same as any other person who assaults two people without provocation. Being a cop gives you the power to enforce the laws - not break them.

Now, if the second account is true, all that is void because the cop was himself assaulted and had to defend himself.

The police officer warned Willett to finish the candy before entering the station because eating or drinking in the Metro system is illegal.

Willett nodded, kept chewing the peanut-and-caramel bar and stuffed the last bit into her mouth before throwing the wrapper into the trash can near the station manager's kiosk, according to both Willett and Curry-Hagler.

Curry-Hagler turned around and followed Willett into the station. Moments after making a remark to the officer, Willett said, she was searched, handcuffed and arrested for chewing the last bite of her candy bar after she passed through the fare gates. She was released several hours later after paying a $10 fine, pending a hearing.

"We've been doing our best to crack down on people who are consuming food and beverages in our stations because we get so many complaints about it," said Lisa Farbstein, a Metro spokeswoman. "In this instance, the woman was given a warning, which she ignored, and she jammed the rest of the candy bar into her mouth and continued to chew."

Willett said she was being unfairly punished because she made fun of the police officer after Curry-Hagler issued a second warning before the arrest.

"Why don't you go and take care of some real crime?" Willett said she told the officer while still swallowing the PayDay bar as she rode a second escalator to catch her Orange Line train home.

In a report, Curry-Hagler said she wanted to issue a citation for eating on the Metro but the PayDay lover refused to stop.

"Next thing I knew, she pushed me into the cement wall, calls for backup and puts handcuffs on me," Willett said.

She said Curry-Hagler patted her down, running her hands around Willett's bust, under her bra and around her waist. Two other officers appeared, and the three took Willett to a waiting police cruiser.

At the D.C. police 1st District headquarters, Willett said, she was locked in a cell with another person. At 9:30 p.m., after she paid a $10 fine, Willett was released to her husband.

"It was humiliating," said Willett, who is to appear in court in October. "It was a complete waste of taxpayers' money and the officers' time as well as mine. It was just about her trying to retaliate against me because I made a comment about how insignificant I thought the matter was."

"I understand the intent of them not wanting people to eat in the Metro," Willett said. "If anything, I was chewing in the Metro."

Farbstein said Willett violated the rules. "Chewing is eating," she said.

Sen. Leo E. Green (D-Prince George's) complained in writing to Metro Chief Executive Richard A. White. "They have better things to do than arrest someone for that," said Green, who has not received a response. "It just seemed way out of bounds."

Metro occasionally has come under fire for what some considered extreme enforcement of its no-eating rules. The best-known example was in 2000, when a transit police officer handcuffed a 12-year-old girl for eating a single french fry on a subway platform.

The incident catapulted Metro into the national spotlight, and talk radio hosts debated whether the agency had gone too far in its devotion to order. A federal judge later said the police were "foolish" to arrest the girl but ruled that Metro did not violate her constitutional rights.

The candy bar arrest follows several recent decisions by Metro that have angered passengers. Metro tried to run two-car trains late at night to save money, but the cars became very crowded. And the transit agency started requiring passengers to pay for parking with SmarTrip electronic fare cards but soon found it was running out of cards.

MacRumors attracts a broad audience
of both consumers and professionals interested in
the latest technologies and products. We also boast an active community focused on
purchasing decisions and technical aspects of the iPhone, iPod, iPad, and Mac platforms.